Re: [E-devel] Re: E CVS: libs/imlib2 gilbertt

On 29 Oct, Richard Lowe scribbled:
-> * raster@... (raster@...) wrote:
-> > On 29 Oct, Tom Gilbert scribbled:
-> > -> * raster@... (raster@...) wrote:
-> > -> > On 29 Oct, Tom Gilbert scribbled:
->
-> <snip>
->
-> > > point though :)
-> > ->
-> > -> Not necessarily. I am thinking of simple little apps that grab a
-> > -> filename from the user and then just imlib_save_image(filename); and let
-> > -> imlib do the rest. With each loader having different shit you add a
-> > -> layer of complexity. They have to parse the filename, determine filetype
-> > -> and do the right thing. I don't mind personally, but it just seems nicer
-> > -> to keep them all the same - somehow.....
-> >
-> > truye - but to save as a file type they have to parse the filename
-> > anyway for ythe output type(ie look at the extension) so they alreayd
-> > knwo the file type- and they knwo for certain formats certainoptions
-> > are suported etc. (ie quality for jpeg, compression for png and db)
->
-> i thought imlib_save_image() parsed the file extension.
no it does not. you need to set the format explicitly - it is extension
agositc when saving. (when loading it tries extension as a best guess
for the format and loader to use first before it tries each loadre in
recency sequence)
--
--------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------------
The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) raster@... raster@...
raster@... raster@...
raster@...